Return to Transcripts main page

At This Hour

Forensic Pathologist Holds Press Conference on Michael Brown Autopsy

Aired August 18, 2014 - 11:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

DR. MICHAEL BADEN, FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: The -- this will calm community and family concerns over cover up or not being told the truth. And very simple things found on day one of the autopsy, as you know with other sudden deaths, and gunshot wounds and stab wounds, that next day, the autopsy results come out, and answers these kind of questions.

How many bullet wounds? And most important, did my loved one suffer? Pain and suffering is a concern. And we can answer those questions on day one on the basis of the injuries, such as when there's a damage to the brain, bullet wound to the brain, that causes immediate loss of consciousness, at that point. And telling that to a family can often be very helpful at a trying time to a family.

So that's why we were call. I must say when we were called, Mr. Crump had said they had been trying to get the federal -- the FBI, the federal government, involved without success at that time, and that's why they wanted me to come in. And shortly after we started the autopsy -- whoops, Channel 5, I'm sorry -- after we started the autopsy, then it was announced that they were going to do another autopsy, which is fine, because it shows the interest and the concern the federal government has in this kind of death.

And you're here -- all here because many black men die of accident, of homicide, every day in this country, and rarely -- and never as far as I recall has the President of the United States gotten involved. The only time the president got involved I remember was Charles Manson did his thing and you guys weren't born in those times and he was very upset by it. But not in a civil rights way.

So I think that understanding what's happening -- and one thing I want to add her though, Mary Case is the chief medical examiner in St. Louis County and she's a very excellent forensic pathologist, and I'm sure her work will turn out to be very excellent when it's released. But again it hasn't been released yet, and the family wants to know certain simple questions that so far we've been able to answer.

Shawn Parcells is -- has been instrumental in the autopsy evaluation. I don't know if you want to point out anything on the -- on the anatomy of the gunshot wounds that -- that beautiful drawing.

PROF. SHAWN PARCELLS, PATHOLOGIST ASSISTANT: First of all, I'm Professor Shawn Parcells and I would like to thank everyone for bringing me into this case. And we're here for the family to answer questions about what happened to Michael Brown. And I want you guys to understand that when an autopsy is done, that

we look at the body in an anatomical position. This is the anatomical position. This is not how we stand, how we walk, but medically speaking, we like to describe wounds this way.

And, as you all know, Dr. Baden and I concluded that he was shot at least six times. We've got one to the very top of the head, the apex. We've got one that entered just above the right eyebrow. We've got one that entered the top part of the right arm. We've got a graze wound, a superficial graze wound, to the middle part of the right arm. We've got a wound that entered the medial aspect of the right arm, and we've got a deep graze wound that produced a laceration to the palm of the right hand.

Now, these two, where the Xes are, represent what Dr. Baden and I feel are possible reentry wounds. So the wound that hit the forehead right above the right eyebrow actually came out right around the right eye and went back in. And then it exited again right here in the jaw line and came out, and went back in to the right shoulder. That's from one bullet. Now, we have to confer that with the first autopsy.

This wound right here to the side of the chest is also a possible reentry wound. Now, which wound on the arm that correlates to, we're not sure. We have to correlate all of this with the first autopsy.

And the other critical point that I want everyone to be very clear on is that this wound to the medial aspect of the right arm, just generally speaking, happened right about here indicate -- OK. So what Dr. Baden and I feel that occurred - and by the way this red mark is showing that same wound, this is not a separate wound. This is showing the same wound, in the same location in that arm, but you are looking at it from the back.

And as the attorneys were saying, there was a witness statement that said that he was walking away and the gun goes off and he kind of jerks. So the question asked to us was could that wound occurred from him walking away and then he turns around?

It's consistent with that. However, understand too that, while the shot could have come from the back, because if I'm standing here walking along and get shot from that direction, you see when I pull my arm up, it's in that same general area. The arm is a very mobile part of your body, so it also could have occurred when he was putting his hands up. So I put my hands up and you see where that wound is at. It could have happened if he put his arms across in a defensive manner. We don't know and we still have to look at other aspects of this investigation before we can really start piecing things together. Dr. Baden.

BADEN: Yes. The attorneys behind me thought that there might be a question among you. We're here to see --

QUESTION: Are any of these wounds inconsistent with the witness accounts that Michael Brown was shot while rushing the police officer?

BADEN: They could be consistent with his going forward or going backward. But they're from the front, and if he was shot going forward, he would collapse right away. The problem -- yes, so it's possible. There are a number of different possibilities to that.

QUESTON: Can you tell how far away?

BADEN: The question was how far away. Yes. We can tell certain distance. We can tell the distance from the muzzle of the gun to the body, and the body's clothing. If there's -- the closer the weapon is to the body, the more powder residue there will be on the body and the skin and the clothing.

In this instance, there's no gunshot residues on the skin surface, so that the muzzle of the gun was at least one or two feet away, the muzzle at the time of discharge. It could have been 30 feet away; it would be the same thing. But in order to be firm about that, we also have to look at the clothing, which we haven't had the opportunity to look at because sometimes the clothing can filter out gunshot residues.

QUESTION: Doctor, can you say how many times he was actually shot? Becaus you were talking about reentry wounds so --

BADEN: There are six bullets strucken, six bullets struck and two may have reentered. And three bullets were recovered at the first autopsy, according to our report. There were the two head wounds and the bullet in the chest stayed in the body and were removed at the first autopsy, from our examination of the body.

One of the things that's going to be important for us to see is the X- rays, the old black and white X-rays that will show where the bullets were at -- before the autopsy was started. And that's documented in X-rays taken before an autopsy in a gunshot wound case.

(CROSSTALK)

QUESTION: Do we know those X-rays exist?

BADEN: Yes. I spoke with Dr. Mary Case and they did all the proper X-rays, photographs, and they should be available at some time. Whether today or whether three or four months from now often depends on what the prosecutor wants to do. That is, Mary Case could have told you everything I'm telling you on day one, but often in an investigation like this, it's not uncommon for prosecutors not to want information released. But I think in my experience, when that happens, it only gets the community more upset.

QUESTION: I have a question.

DARYL PARKS, BROWN FAMILY ATTORNEY: Ma'am, are you a member of the media?

QUESTION: I am not.

PARKS: Only the media. Only the media.

QUESTION: Can we get access to the clothing? Are there any signs of (INAUDIBLE) --

BADEN: I didn't hear.

QUESTION: Can you get access to the clothing, and was there any signs of any struggle?

BADEN: Two things. Access to the clothing. I think, at think at some point, we should -- the defense should have access to the clothing. That depends largely -- the clothing is now, from Dr. Case's advice in the Los Angeles -- St. Louis County police agency normally. They're going to be looking at it. It's up to them when the defense -- not defense, the families will have access to it. So at some time, there will be access to it and the results. As far as the other part of the question was --

QUESTION: Were there any signs of struggle?

BADEN: Any signs of struggle? There weren't signs of a struggle. In talking about a struggle, one of the things that the attorneys have also asked for is the medical examination of the officer who was in a struggle. So signs of injury to the officer, to Michael Brown, are both needed.

One thing is that there are abrasions around the right side of Mr. Brown's face, rubbing against the ground, which happened as best as we can tell when -- after the gunshot wounds, he fell flat down, unprotected and got those abrasions. Otherwise, no evidence of a struggle and it will be important in evaluation of the case for the medical examiner, for the FBI, for the defense -- not defense, the family to see what happened to the officer.

QUESTION: Doctor, doctor --

BADEN: Yes, over here for a second.

QUESTION: Can you tell me where the autopsy took place and how long?

BADEN: Our autopsy that we did -- the first autopsy at the county medical examiner, second one was at the -- second one was at the Arthur Lane Funeral Home where the body was delivered for burial, and we did that in the office, and it was about a three, four-hour autopsy, reautopsy.

QUESTION: How do your findings resemble or differ from the county autopsy results?

BADEN: Well, we can't answer that until we see the county. I'm -- my impression, having done this some 50 years or so, is that they're going to be very similar. There.

QUESTION: (INAUDIBLE) do you expect to happen (INAUDIBLE)?

BADEN: I think they are available now. The autopsy records are available now. When it's going to be released is probably up to the prosecutor.

PARKS: Right here. Excuse me. Right here.

QUESTION: I have a question. (INAUDIBLE) at the end, you said, would it be consistent what police said had happened or witnesses happened? Talk a little bit more about how (INAUDIBLE).

BADEN: Well, the autopsy itself counted as consistent with police or witnesses. There are many different witness testimonies. Many of them seem to line up in one direction, some in another direction. Right now, till we get more information, till we get from a forensic science point of view, can't distinguish -- can't make a definite judgment.

Now, the lawyers who've interviewed witnesses -- we haven't interviewed, we don't interview witnesses -- may be impressed with some witnesses who seem more -- more trustworthy than others, and as the police are doing too. This is what juries are supposed to do. Juries are supposed to look at the witnesses and tell who is telling the truth and who isn't, but lawyers do that all the time. And so they have more information than we have.

But right now, from the science point of view, we can't determine which witness, and there are all different kinds of observations made, is most consistent with all of the forensic findings.

(CROSSTALK)

PARKS: In the green.

QUESTION: Doctor, you mentioned transparency, you mentioned scientific information, and you mentioned standards (ph). Was there any investigative reason, any scientific reason, why this information could not have been released after day one? Is there any --

BADEN: Well, look -- this is a judgment based on -- and this is one of the things that the family was concerned about. Even though we know when an autopsy is done, when any autopsy is done that you guys go to, 95 percent of the information is available right away -- stab wounds, gunshot wounds. Things like microscopic slides and toxicology, which may be of value, but don't determine the cause of death; whether or not a decedent has cocaine on board might be on value to see why an incident happened, but it has nothing to do with the cause of death.

So I think my impression is that the -- like in most medical exam examiner's offices, when an autopsy is completed, the medical examiner can release it immediately, or most of it, pending the prosecutor's wishes, because if the prosecutor says that that's going to interfere with our investigation, then medical examiners hold up and the families may not know for weeks or months the kind of questions we're talking about.

BENJAMIN CRUMP, BROWN FAMILY ATTORNEY: Two more. Two more.

QUESTION: Can you speculate in what order the wounds occurred?

PARCELLS: I don't think we can -- we cannot speculate exact order of gunshot wounds. Forensically, that's impossible. However, Dr. Baden and I do feel that, because of the two gunshot wounds to the head, indicating that Mr. Brown was bending over as they were coming down, that those two shots were most likely the last two to occur to him.

BADEN: That's about as far as we can go.

QUESTION: How about toxicology?

BADEN: The toxicology results have to be done by the medical examiner at the first autopsy. They get the blood and everything out. Second autopsy, no more blood and there's been embalming fluids, et cetera. So we have to wait for the medical examiner and it depends how quickly they're rushed. The toxicology should be able to be done in a week or two, but oftentimes it gets on the end of the line of all the other cases that they're dealing with and may take months. But that should be available, especially with your concern and the president's concern, it should be available very soon.

CRUMP: Well, we got a feeling that that toxicology report, like other things, will be released to you sooner than later. There was one question from a non-press person. We wanted to ask it and then we were going to -- yes, ma'am.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: Thank you. My question is the four shots that entered his body first, I'm assuming that he could have survived? Am I correct?

BADEN: Yes, he could have all the -- that's good and I should have mentioned something. All of these gunshot wounds were survivable except for the one at the top of the head that went through the brain.

UNIDENTIFIED FEMALE: With that being said, and all of us here know what happened to Michael, why hasn't Mr. -- Officer Wilson been arrested?

(APPLAUSE)

BADEN: You know, who gets arrested, as you know, is a political district attorney decision and it's not a forensic science decision, for good or for bad.

CRUMP: Thank you all.

PARCELLS: Thank you.

MICHAELA PEREIRA, CNN ANCHOR: Welcome to @THISHOUR, I'm Michaela Pereira. We're taking an in-depth look at the ongoing dispute over the shooting of 18 year old Michael Brown. I am Michaela Pereira, here in New York. John Berman is off.

We've just wrapped up a press conference held at the Greater Saint Mark Missionary Baptist Church where we heard from Benjamin Crump, the family attorney, along with Darrel Gates, co-counsel. And then, of course, the forensic pathologist hired by the family, Dr. Michael Baden. He's a preeminent pathologist and has been key in this case because the family, obviously, wanted to have their own independent pathology exam and autopsy. I have got the best in the business joining me right now. We have got George Howell in the St. Louis Suburb.

Actually let's just listen in for one second and we'll talk with some of our guests.

BADEN: So we can only tell that -- the direct it's going in, but that direction could be up or kneeling or down, and that depends on other factors which the lawyers know more than we know.

CRUMP: You want to point out what the last shot --

BADEN: Yes. This is the last shot, and this is the only shot that is not treatable.

QUESTION: What does that mean?

BADEN: Well, it went in the top and it went slightly to the front, from the middle of the brain to sort of the right side of the brain.

QUESTION: It stayed in?

BADEN: Yes, it stayed in and was recovered at -- slightly forward.

CRUMP: Okay. Thank you.

QUESTION: Could this have come from behind?

BADEN: Only if he was double jointed and could -- it's more likely to be consistent with --

CRUMP: Either kneeling or bending forward. As Attorney Parks said -- no more questions. Let's go. That is fine. Let's go. No more questions. We've answered your question.

BADEN: Thank you all. Thank you.

PEREIRA: All right. It looks as though the press conference has just wrapped up there at Greater Saint Mark Missionary Baptist Church. That last comment was from Dr. Michael Baden who was talking about that shot to the head.

We know that Michael Brown was shot at least six times, they have confirmed that he was shot six times. They are saying that there could be more. Again, this was a preliminary autopsy report. One done, at the family's behest by Dr. Michael Baden and Professor Parcells. All of the wounds were survivable except for the one at the top of the head.

I want to discuss all of this, it is really a lot to wade through. We have George Howell in the St. Louis suburb of Ferguson, also our colleague Don Lemon, who has been on the ground there is also in Ferguson. Joe Johns joins us with more on the investigation, and I have to say this is a great get for us. Leading forensic pathologist Cyril Wecht. Thank you so much for joining us. Here in studio with me is legal analyst Danny Cevallos. Gentlemen, there is so much for us to get through, I think the first

thing we have to talk about, is the fact - And I will address this, maybe, to Don, the first thing that we heard was that the mother of Michael Brown wanted to know three things. Wanted to know how many times her son was shot, heartbreakingly she wanted to know if her son had felt any pain. And then lastly she said what else do we need to give them to arrest the killer of my child. What kind of reaction are you hearing and what do you sense you are going to get on the ground there in Ferguson?

DON LEMON, CNN ANCHOR: Listen, we've gotten tons of reaction. Some people listened here on loud speakers when they hold these press conferences, and people here, just in the last couple of minutes, before I answer your questions, people have been told here that they are allowed to protest but they have to keep moving. They cannot assemble. They cannot stop. And so that has caused a little consternation. You can see the police presence here for the folk who have gathered here. You remember these big meeting points, no longer a big meeting point. You can protest but you have to keep moving you can't congregate.

Yes, one thing she wanted to know was whether her son suffered. And you heard them say no, he didn't suffer. How many shots? They say at least six shots. What else do we have to do to get the officer arrested? And that's interesting because they are very vehemently called for an arrest of this officer, and there is some concern about that, because - Especially from the people who are here, who are gathering and saying, we don't want to push for an arrest when it's too fast and then it ends up like George Zimmerman, where the outcome is not what they wanted. Those are the three things that you asked me and those are the three answers that I can give you.

And just so you know, that press conference, what's happening here where I am, the people are being told that they can't congregate and the National Guard, it's going to -- we're going to have to see how all of this plays out in the coming moments, Michaela.

PEREIRA: Don, actually, if we can, if we still have time later this hour, I would love to talk to you more about that because there is a concern about what all of this information -- what effect that is going to have on the ground there in Ferguson.

Stick with me for a second. I want to bring in our forensic pathologist. I think we're really lucky to have Dr. Cyril Wecht with us. I want to know, first blush, what did you make of what we heard at the press conference, sir?

DR. CYRIL WECHT, FORENSIC PATHOLOGIST: Well, it confirms what had been reported earlier. I would point out, as I have already done so in previous discussions, that it was premature to have stated, as I read in the national newspapers this morning, that the shots were all from the front, because the arm can move in different directions. And when someone is running, then you may be struck in the back. And when you look at the body, as the professor pointed, out in a supine position, the anatomic position, then it would appear that shots were fired from the front. With regard to conscious pain and suffering, I disagree. The shots to

the arm, which I think came first, that did produce some pain, obviously. And then furthermore, if the shot that entered around the eye came before the shot that went into the brain, then there was pain there. The shot to the brain, then was the coup d'etat, and there was nothing there after. I don't mean to be critical, I am just pointing out some things that have to be considered.

PEREIRA: Sure.

WECHT: The point that I have made, too, is regrettable about this third autopsy. That should have been worked out before. The Armed Forces Institute of Pathology people should have been there. They should have worked together, professional collegiality.

Because, remember, when you do an autopsy, you are dissecting the body. You are going through structures that have been traversed and damaged. Number two, the second autopsy, you have to do further dissection, so now you have the third autopsy, and things are significantly obfuscated. With regard to clothing, there's no clothing on the head and if the young man was wearing a T-shirt, then except maybe for the top wound on the right arm, the other wounds would not have been covered. I do not know what that garment was.

And then a very important point is that this boy, 6'3 with a shot coming around the eye and moving downward, exiting in the jaw and entering above the right clavicle, that clearly is downward. You have someone who is falling. If you want to conjecture, what if he was charging like a mad bull toward an officer with a gun, I find that unlikely. Most likely he was already toppling and his head was pitched forward when that shot was fired and moved in a downward trajectory. That all has to be taken into consideration.

PEREIRA: Doctor, we should point out as the doctor himself mentioned, Dr. Baden mentioned, this is a preliminary report. Give us an idea on when we would expect the full autopsy report, and again there's the county autopsy report. There's this independent report, and then there's also the federal autopsy that will be done. How long until we can expect those results to be completed, the full autopsies?

WECHT: That is completely unpredictable. Dr. Baden correctly pointed out. That's a decision that's going to be made by the prosecutorial authorities as high as the attorney general of the state and possibly now, with the DOJ involved, by Eric Holder. I assure you that their findings are complete. I'm sure that they have already completed their toxicology findings. They have looked at the slides microscopically. They have the report back from the forensic science lab regarding the clothing. They have it all there.

As to when it is to be released, that is a matter that is completely unpredictable at this point. It will depend on what the prosecution wants to do. And the same thing will hold true with the third autopsy that is, what is it taking place today or tomorrow, whether they release it. I don't know.

I think inasmuch as this autopsy has been released, in detail, I think that it would be wise for everybody to step forward and speak from a forensic scientific standpoint as to the findings of the first autopsy, findings of the third autopsy, no conclusions of a legal nature. Nothing to do with whether the shooting was justifiable or so on, that will all come later. But from a forensic scientific standpoint there's no reason why the results of the shooting, the number of shots and the direction, the trajectory, the distance, et cetera, why that should not be released and put on the table in a professional, objective, scientific fashion.

PEREIRA: You know what, I have to give you hats off. Maybe science should lead this. It seems that passion, and anger, and frustration have led this. I appreciate you saying that.

Stand by because I want to bring in Joe Johns and Danny Cevallos, if I can do a two-fer here. One of the things that I found very interesting and very telling about what Dr. Baden said was that all of these answers could have been provided on day one in terms of transparency.

Joe, where do we stand with the investigation? What do we know about the Feds, what do we know about what is going on there on the investigative front? And then I am going to turn to Danny to talk about that as well.

JOE JOHNS, CNN SENIOR WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT: Well, we know the Feds are going to do an autopsy of their own as they continue this investigation into the question of whether the civil rights of Michael Brown may have been violated.

Look, when you listen to all of this stuff from the people there in Ferguson, one thing remains a question and that is whether this is justifiable deadly force by a police officer in the conduct of his duties. That's probably the critical question. An officer is entitled to use deadly force to protect himself or a third person from serious physical bodily harm or death. So you have six shots here, and the question, of course, the critical question is whether this young man was moving forward, if he was moving backward. Those kind of questions have to be left to the investigation and the people in Washington, D.C., who have an interest in this thing are going to be looking to those questions as well, Michaela.

PEREIRA: All right, Joe. Thank you for that.

Danny is sitting with me here in the studio. You've had a chance to listen to the press conference, listened to the pathologist, you have listened to our pathologist here. What are some sticking points for you in terms of all this?